Ask HN: Why did literate programming not catch on?

Re:Ask HN: Why did literate programming not catch on? by No1 on Sunday August 16, 2015 @11:18PM (#10071218)

> most fast-growing startups have oral cultures where the way to learn about the software is to ask the last person who worked on it

"Oral culture" - I like that euphemism.

It's not disorganized, confused, poorly-planned, and glaring technical debt, no, it's "culture."

> Most real-world products face new requirements on a weekly, sometimes hourly basis

If your requirements are changing on an hourly basis, it's time to have a serious talk with your project manager.

> Google/Alphabet, which wasn't even the same company last week

Let's not pretend that some corporate moniker shuffling had overnight effects upon their codebases.

> Because software changes so rapidly.

So you don't have time to change your tests or other dependencies?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ask HN: Why did literate programming not catch on? by rodgerd on Sunday August 16, 2015 @11:37PM (#10071278)

It's arguably not really a fair use of the term "oral culture" either. Most actual oral cultures placed a high premium on the ability to accurately retain core information (e.g. the whakapapa in Maori) with prestige for being able to convey it well.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ask HN: Why did literate programming not catch on? by collyw on Monday August 17, 2015 @05:06AM (#10071948)

You must have a nice cushy well defined corporate job if you think that constantly changing requirements are something unusual.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ask HN: Why did literate programming not catch on? by No1 on Monday August 17, 2015 @01:21PM (#10074588)

Changing requirements are quite normal, but changing by the hour is just poor project management, no matter what the environment.

[ Parent | on HN ]